The Sun. — London, England, 1810-05-08 00:00:00

i roe, uke N ot:mirth an He I uuse e s ' is (0 file Con y pte ; now IP .II rivilege wh i ` If those In : sere to ebtaxil to deleg 3 , House erect at i l t o , meet v` b 8 • to cons' or of • . , •... be wished to sugge s t th e p rorr i e ty, i n or d er to pie s:Tve unanimity in its proceedings, that the word opinion' shoal ! be left out, and in its stead, tc,/ in troduce" that the Committee:should-report the re.. suit of, theiringuiries, with such observatits' as to them might seem fit." He was induced to this, because, as celerity was necessary, the report Might ba earlier made.- . The CHANCRI:Lbit of the EXcHEQUER was dis posed to give the subject the most di Tass4.inate consideration, tut the alteration proposed by his. .earned Friend had • so little difference in i: from - the .word proposed to he- kit out ; that he hardly knew ,why his 'Learned Friend-to preserve* unaqimityshould `think it necessary to propoSe its SOSstit in ion. Gentle ,lnett opposite - seemed to have talked themselves into ,these calth and dispassionate considerations, as they ,termed them,for hardly was an emendmeht proposed, wwhe,n up starts another Gentlemsan ; and proposes ,a -third. If wan disposed to accede to the first, : might be charged, not only with ignorance of.-tle ,course to adopt; biit might be liable to be accused : of vacillation, and amendments might . come, .one ,after the. other, until the contest -would ,be conti _plied. without end. He hoped the House-.would :excuse him, and forgave him when he said that he ,lament4d the spirit ,wiih which •the discuss:on of „this question had bf,•en,carriecl on. It was a ques , lion en which he Might have expelled that_ at least be should have had neutrals to deal with, but the Gentlemen on the opposite Side of the,House thought the opportunity too tempting to pass by ; and there fore they judged it a proper one to eiercise t hat re 'riling spirit which they so well know how to exer-, vise. Attuated,,no doubt, by that wish for unani- • talky which his Learned Friend (Mr. Adam) had so earnestly recommended, he had no hesitation in. be lieving that all were unanimous in adesire to.pre serve their privileges, and yet it would seem;-, from those Gentlemen, that they thought nut. He must assure the House that he had no wish to turn the question to way, advantage, ,Whafever vic v others flight entertain; he bad prepared the names for the Committee, which he thou,..ht would be acceptable to ,both sidei. The /light . Hon. Gentleinaii ften •noticed,• the attack of the Hon. _Gentleman (Mr. Whitbread) which he observed ‘ ,. .s a groundless one, for it might' with equal pr prety be.applicd to his (Mr. W.'s) friends. Wj,, had the. Right lion. Gentle - 1 -mm - (Mr. Ponsonhy) complained that lie (Mr. P.) could not give the House advice how , to proceed-in tlys business. The want of advice froai that Right Hon. Gent. to wlioni the . Gentlemen on ills side looked up to as their leader, • was a charge. 'which he was liable to. He was equally bound to give his advice and assistance in a matter which affect ethbe House in cotlinion. To be sure, he was r e edy to admit, that the Right Hon. Gentleman and his • friends might be taken by surprise. On a former • tight they had not condescended to illuminate.the darkness .whjch spread around with one ray fr,tu theii enlightened minds. Nay, even on. this evening (Hood aloof and did-not venture to prescribe the to be pursued.. The Gentleman opposite seemed to think, tharir, cases where there was no danger to the privileges, and ‘4 hen resistance Might De expected to- thesen , ence of the House, then it was not proper to maintain them. Toe Right Hon. Gaitletnati re- - ferred „to . the case in 177 t, in which g COmmittee had been appointed, who w, ere delegated with powers to examine into facts and circumstances - att-ndiog that case (Mr. aiver's), and to report their opinions to the House. He hoped that the House would find no difficulty in the present CaSe in concurring with the Committee (if adopted). , Mr. G. PONSONBY thought the Right Hon. Gen tleman had lost his . t .toper vt hen be attacked' his _side of the With respect to his (Mr. P.' s ) giving advice, he .tartto observe that-wbeo h.-"had on former occasions presumed so to do, his advice had bee n rejected. It would ::91. be decent for him again to obtrude, beside', we were told try the highest au ttiority, that if the blind lead the blind, both- might • fall into a ditch."—He titerefore must be excused fro nt coming forward. - When the Right Honourable Gentleman blamed. him ,and his friends for ohjeei ing to the - committal of Sir Francis Burdett on ac. count of fear, he did not think they were justified lii that i•opotalion. He did not believe there was more pusiilanunity on his side of the House than Oil the other. With respect to giving his opinions, what reason could he have to suppose that the Alijority of the House should follow Clem. When the proper time carne he should offer them, but he Would not be taunted into giving them. Mr. WIIITBISEAD made a few aberrations in ex- planation. • , Mr. W.WyNNE, in reference to the.case 61177 i, thought it a mo,t contemptible report, which he said was pto.luced *by a weak administration for their own pa Ocular purpose. The House then divided on the amendment— Ayes Noes 5 8 itcs • 57 Majority against it - Another division immediately took place on the original motion Far the original Motion Against it - - n 6 • •• 16 e. 45 - . Majority - w - - 7 o . • On our re-admission into the Gallery, we found that the Speaker had just finished reading the names of the Members of the ComMittee. On the motion, " that the Committee do meet to-morrow ?Naming at nine o'clock at the Speaker's Chambers," Mr. JEKYLL made a rew observations on the im portance of the subjett—a subjea which he had ' boped would never have been brou g ht b e f ore that house for 'discussion. iTtnler the circumstances in Which the Speaker found himself, he bad felt it his bounden duty to throw isim-elt upon the 11.y1se for advice he had asked that advice, and he (Mr. .1.) prayed God to grant'that the advice whizh the House would give might be saluilry. Tuey wt re involved In a dilemma of the most unfavourable nature. It was imposSible for 'them to re-tread their steps, and it became therefore more necessary that they should • be•cautioug with respect to their mode of advance. The House, after tw - ollivisions, had determined on t he. appointment of a Committee to consid e r the , • 4atts, and to repot to the House their opinion.--.- Those who sat on his side of the House were ad verse to any requisition to the Committee to furnish: an opinion ; • but yetthe Right Hop. Gentleman had several 01 those so adverse, as Members 43 , 1 ' the C omm i ttee .. S ome w h o Were present b ad t )\ , cletiitl6:l taking a part in it—but otbtrs who w i re etdehtally abient' remained upon tho' list. 14e • thought it ,would be but candour on the part of the Right Hon, Gentleman to'omit the names to which he alltideo. No reply was made, and the motion was agreed 'to without a division. Mr. LITTLETON gave . notice 'that he would to inOrrOW move for copies- of certain Papers in pos session of his Majesty's.Advocate.General respect ing the case Captairr Foskett.. He also gave notice that on Thtirsday se'enight lie would move the House to .take into conside:ration C-iptaitt Fosketes Petition. The object othis motion on the latter sub ject. would be to propose a resolution of censure on ths Commander in Chief for pot. enforcing the 26th article of war, &c. and an address to Majesty,.t hat he would require,the Comniaeder in Chief•to Make a 'report to him on. Captain Foskett's case. LIVERY OF LoNDaisr. Mr. Alderman Comss prefaced the motion of which he had given notice, by ,observing that the right of petitioning was one of the chief bulwarks : of a free. Constitution, and that no impediment should - be thrown in the way to prevent the petitions of the people from reaching the hands of ~ the Sovereign. After having described the four distinct branches of which the Corporarion : of the City of London was formed, viz. the Lord Mayor and • Conti' of Aldermen; the Court of Common Councilmen, the 'Court of L eutenantcy, and the Livery; usual!) , termed the Common Hall;, he oh served that it , was the rights of the last named _body that had' suffered - on-the: occasion Which he-'was about to subtroi to the consideration o f the TiOuse;! The Livery: of Loiidon Imo long- laid claim to the right of presenting their petitions to his Majeqy sitting on the thkone, .Of _late_ year's that right had b-ien denied. To prove the existence of the right, he entered into a iohg ois;oric:ti account-of :the pre cedents on the subject. .lo 1'770,in 1771, in 1773, and in 1775, his Majesty received petitions from the Livery of London sitting on the throne; but after having se received.their petition in 1775, Lord Her-- turd wrote a letter to - .the Lord Mayoe, informing him, that fur -the futUre his Majesty would not re ceive any eetitioes on the throne hut from tie Boy Oa - prate. At the next Common Hall several , re- . solutioes were passed, declaratory of the right of the. Livery on the subjeet ; and in 'June 1775, another 'Address to his Majesty was agreed to, , with a parti cular injunction to tile Lord Mayor not tO , present it except to his Majesty smiting on the Augur. The Sheriffi having waited on his Majesty to know when he would be pleased to receive the Address,- were answered, that his Majesty would receive it at the next Levee. To a trpreseination that the Lord Mayor and Sheriffs were enjoined not to pry sent the Address except to his Majesty-sitting on the throne, his Majesty's- reply was, that he was dwars ready to receive the vetitions of his subjeds; bin he add ed, that he must be,' the best judge how he would receive them, and thu he wont ereceive the Ad-tress' from tile Livery at toe next Levee. That A idress was_ consA deafly onpresented- In 178 t, in 1797, and in Ilion, similar fate attended different peti tions of the. Livery of London, and th 'e .petitions also •remaini-d: onpresented; -in the' last case, the Con-non Hall adopting resoiutions it eilar to those of the year 1775. lie' now cattle to the case 'which he vAa-i anxiols to bung under discussion. In the latter end of y ar, Common Hall agreed to adihyss h:s Niaji:sty, stating-the grievances unaer whic6 t- cy ian,;red ; oppryssed as rtt.,y•were with taxes to an nuniense aiiiount —an Oppression which was r. ielered inure galling ay the mal-adini-• nistration of :he Pohlie Re• enue„-- b. the want of confi fence in. the individuals who were at the head of his Majesty's Government. 1.. eonsi , ieration, however, of the state of his Majesty's 'leant), it was resolved to wave the right of the Livery to present that Address to his Majesty on the throne (to- which right they still maintain their claim) ; and to-content themselves wiih presenting it at the Levee. On December 14, 1809, the Sheriffs, on applying to know when his Majesty would be phased to receive the Address of the Livery, were told that his testy would nut even receive it at the :Levee, but that it must be put into the hands of the Secietary of State. This answer the Sheriffs reported, to the Livery, who in consequence came ,to a resolution, that their Address Should be delivered only to his Majesty's own baud , . 00 the 20th of D'eci-tuber, the Sheriffs mode anothrr application, but tii.ere an s .vered by the. Secretary of State, that . his Majesty had already coinnomic iced his pleasure on that sub. jest. On this the Common H elf adopted resolutioni similar to 'hose they had adopted on -two former oc casions. Coeviticed that his'Majesty's advisers had failed in • their duty, when they advised hiS Majesty to refuse to rrceice the Address if the-Liverymen in the way in which his Maj. sty ciao tieretofore ex pressed his willingness to nceive ettem, and trusting that be had impressed ilia convilion on \ the House . , he would -not trouble them any further, but content himself with moving a resolution to the following, effe&: " That the obstru6uion given 'by his Majesty!s Ministers to the reception by hisMiiiesty on the 14th of December, 1809, of the 'Address of the Lord Mayor,- Aldermen, and,Livery, in Common Hall assembled, is an' infiiigement on the right of the subject to petition the Sovereign on alb lawful:Qua, 'stuns." • „, of h;S atjesty',s Ministeii et least to alvise his Majesty todsave Teeeived the Peeision : in person. • Mr. SeeretaryDeli was satisfied that his Hon. Friends near liter 'would not have put the construc tion which they had done on the aEtual question, had it not been for a kind of sympathy t hich led thein as tray from a due consideration of thecase before the House. The proposed Resolution involved no less than a:direct charge against his Majesty's Aflinisters of having infringed the rights of the shhjed. If there were.any foundation fer•this charge, the motion of the worthy .41dermsti, harsh as it might, seem, did not go farenough. If his Majesty's Ministers had been guilty of obstructing one of the Most valuable and important rights of the - .subjedtlie right of petition ing—he. had no difficulty in s lyink,Ahat they deserved net only the implied' :censure wesich the Resolution conveyed, but the direct and. positive -anitnadversion'of the House of Commons . .. He was convinced, 'however, that he should be able in a very few words tetsatisfy the Hebse (and he almost • _hoped to satisfy the worthy - Alderman) that there was no ground for the . present motion. The first • queeeion to be considered was, whether the Livery at London had any ,distinet and exclusive right with fespeer to the mode of petitioning his Majesty supe! rior to.fhat of any other dais of his Majesty's sub . jeds ; for it was not prete.•kisei by the Honourable Moeer that his .Majeay's Ministers had attempted. to obstruct the Petioon 'of the Livery train r aeeine ' the _King. The eoMpleint ;se - Tis net th At is M s y's itiliiiisters had atterepleaeto ele. Kl e e the nee: the Livery 'enjoyed in common with the rest of I'is Majesty's subjeets ; but 'that they had aeviseu Ins Majesty not to alleW the Livery to exerrese a right. seperior . to tleit'of the rest of the subj( ets of ibe realm. There were three modes in which the Pe .eitions or Addre.sses.of the people were conveyed to ehis•Majestys . The first was, when his Majesty re ceived them'on the. throne ; in which case (and in winch case oniy) his Majesty 'returned an answer. •By long usage his mode of leaving Petitions received was enjoyed by tie two Universities , and by the . Corporation Of the City of London. Tile rum mode was, by, presenting them to his Majesty at the, Lesee ; on _which oc'ca , :io:a his Majesty deliv e r e d ihqm to the Lord in I ,\T Ling. The third and last. mode Was that whicir was adapted since the unior tuuate state.of itisMajeSty's sight had induced bias to discoreinue holding Levee, namely, by trans ruittiee sect) Addresses or Petitions to the:Secretory of Stare for the Home Department. This last was . the mode submitted for, receiving - them at the Levee, and whiCh the Livery of I,:rodou'were at liberty to adopt if trier, thohght proper. Ever Siece 1 the unfortunate event to which he had alluded, it' been uniforedy adoieed without an hveanee of coin plaint, except in the solitary case beiole the house. :The worthy 'Alderman in his history of .thesuojed had truly stated that although before that perieo his Majesty bad not received the Petition's of the Li very on. the Throne, "yet that between the y ea , s 'l77o.and 1775, his Majesty b..a, in several ii.- ; stances so receieed theta. 1775, however, Lord' Hertford (as lee worthy •Alderman hal in deed stated) address:d a letter to s Mr,. Willies,. then Lord Mayor, informing him that his Ma-. jesty :would:not. for the fur ore receive on the Throne i any petitiOns hut those from time Body Corporate. On this eirconi,tance he was inclined to lay much more stress than . the worthy Alderman had done, because he-thought the• House Would . see cl,arly by it, not only that the Livery of Lo ieun had ne ac tual right to the privilege white. [11(4 had in some few cases enjoyed, that the luau 1.1 , ,i.114 of : that day, wno were .the Most likely to ruseitaiti such right ; if it actually existed, were web satisfied t.,at it really did nut exist.' The times CO A ;lice he_ au-: verted were no ordinary times. Men> o those who heard hire would recoiled, and ad w,,e ueera Iron knew, that. they . were times not very ea similar to: the present; that they 'were times Wilt/1 -a great . popular ferment had been excited in tee L'e.y of London.—At that periol Mr.Wrlkes was in tee en joyment of great popular rty. " The futn's of li berty e(to use iris own worth) had not evaporated in his sineceree the volcano ;vas not extiatct, but in the full blaze of its eruption." 'What was the con ' chid of Mr. Wilkes on receiving Lord HA t'ord's letter ? That letter was dated the II th of April.— : 'Was it not natural to suppose, that had Me ss'ilkes been convinced of the existence of sues aright in the Livery of London, he would have immediately summoned the 'Common Hall in lay the letter be- . fore them ?. Wo u ld h e ' not ' i nstan tly ha ve appli e d to Parliament thr redress ? What was the case ? On the second day of May (three weeks after' the ' receipt of the letter) Mr. Wilkes wrote an answer to Lord Hertford ; but not until the 27th of May ' (six weeks after the, receipt of the letter) did he make any application to Parliament, nor until the 24th of June (ten weeks after . the receipt of the letter) did he summon a Comm on Hall on thesub s jed. He (Mr. Ryd er ) was t h e more ,anxious to impress these fads upon the House, because he be lieved that the occurrences of those times were by many deenied the best precedents to follow at 'pre sent. On the 24th of June the Livery passed ge e veral ResOlutions, almost precisely similar to the Resolutions passed in the first week of January last— violent ‘ censure of the Ministers by whose advice his ,Majesty had been induoed to ad : and instrute ions Sir W. CURTIS seconded the motion, which, in to their Representatives in Parliament, to endeavour his opinion, was so proper, that he did n, , t wiped t to obtain the punishment of those who were then any opposition would be made to it. ,Although he termed the authors of that which they termed an did not approve of the sentiments, contained in the infringement of.their rights. But although these Address of the Cominon Hall alluded ,to, he w as instructions were given to a ll th e b ou lefeus of that persuaditdthat the Livery of London had a right to day—to Mr. Wilkes, and Mr. Sziwbridge, and Mr. present the adoress to his Majesty in person, and j Oliver, not one word, was uttered by them in Par they ought to nave been admitted into his Majesty' s . - liament on the assumed infraction of right, and n o r presence tor that purpose. a word on the subject Was contained in the resolu- Sir C. Nick also supported the motion of his . tions Moved by. Mr. Sawbridge. The fact was; that worthy colleague,. although. he differed very much • they felt that his Majesty's Ministers, in .put ieg the from him in his opinion of the, conduct of his Ma- Livery of London on the same tooting - with the rest jesty's Ministers in other respeets; He particularly 'of his Majesty's snbjetis, bad only done justice to thought that the country was much indebted to Mi- the latter. , .19 making this remark, he begged not nisters for the way in which they had recently re- 1 to be understood as meaning any slight to that body, stor-d peace to the Metropolis. for which, when not under the enntrour of certain Sir J. SHAW, after the able. manner in which his i individuals, he enterraiiied a high respedt. Tire worthy colleague had stated . the subject to • the i worthy Alderman, he believed; Wai noi aware that he House, was satisfied that it• would evince a very bad I might have directed his Motion with as much pro taste were be to go over the same grounds. He felt Pn.etY against the. House of Commons' as against it his bou ,, clen duty to support the motion. The his .Alljes!y's Ministers. He was not aware of" a Cc., non) Itill, from Whom the Address procei-dect, paisige which he might fit d 'in Hafsell'sPieeedents. [The Right Hon. (..;..litiernan, nere 'read the :,assage Ilan been -legally convened. ; and h av i ng wav ed t h e i r , claim to be receive; hy,.cii, e Ki n g on the 'Throne, in to \ s ` l ""ii be alleded.j 7 -Af:ei- .having' observed, that a P.. ttican from. fire Lied Mc, or rind the Body consequence of the state of ills INl a j e .ty' s . h ea l t h, b e ' humbly conceived that it would have b4eu the duty i Corporate uf London tni,glit tie vlesented to the House of _Pqmmons by the Sheri but that it - : ; ::1 3 e r tition.,,frota the Livery m us t b e , rresented by at IVl4ber:ana not by the Sheriff, the writer p : o c s :e 'ea to menti-In a .case, in winch a Conin;on baiing diretted their Petition to be, pre-enied to :he House of Comm ns by the Sheriti, the seakvr, before theadliission of the Sheriff to the B try sent to him to inform him, that he must not pre,ent the Petition, but that it must be.ptesented b ; a Mem ber; and that 'the - P.,!thion was consequently pre , sented by Sir'W. Lewes. Thus it apptared th a t .th e. House of Commons proceeded precisely on the same grounds as his Majesty's Ministers had done. For himself, he could clistinelly'deciate, that since he had entered upon the otfice he had the honour tn hold, be did not believe that a shgle Petition had. hen : transmitted to h;rn which' had not ma( hest his Majesty., He bad licitly omitted to state, that when the circumstance occurred on which the pro posed .resolution w,is founded, the Sheriffs of Loa don had anoth,:r Petition from the Body Corporate, which they piesented to his, Majesty. If it were said that it would have been ,easy so allow tI em to present to 4isMaiesty at the same time the Petition from the Livery, .he would reply, that if once a point of that kind were relinquished, subsequent resistance was rendered Much snore difficult, for the dek ration would be pleaded as a precedent for future coadutl. The-Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by, reading •his an,w..r to she Sheriff's, in reply to the application made by them tor ihe purpose of ascer taii,ing when his Majes:y would teceive the Address of the .Livery. answer (which has already been Rblisited) contained the reasons which in auced his Majesty ,not to dedart from the course which ise•pursued -- towards' the other classes of his subjects. • Lord FOLLESTONE contended alai al! his Majesty's -subjetts had a right to d‘. liver their Pstitions into the'hands of his Majesty himself; and. that the shs- Viation of late pais from that oramice had occasiOn ed great complaint and rankling. The Bill of Itiethts declared that the right of Petition was inheteet in the. subject. At the co•nmencernent of the present reign it was the nusiorn for his Majesty to receive the Petitions ef his subjsets at all -tines. In conse- Ap.e.nce however or the attsme , o; Nitegaret Nichol. - son, this usage had be-n cuitaied, and a regulation was made, that f. r the future Petitions, should be received by his Majesty only at the Levee. Now, however, that was done away ;,and all that reniain ed to the subject was the power of transmitting his Petition VS the Secretary of State, to be by him handol to his Majssty. •This was a most unsatiss factory mole of- 'petitioning. The P eition might probably accuse - the. very indisidusl lie was to be the chat - met of conveying it to the Crown. • The Right Hon. Gentleman said that since lie came into ofti-e, he believed not a single Petition that bad been sent to him bad failed in reaching the King. Was such a belief a sufficient security for the subjea ?-- Beside, be bad heard some stories of Petitions lying man, months in the pigeon -holes of office, unopened and unrepresented. One 'evidence. that these Ad d.esses did not in ali cases reach his Majesty, aps peered to h:m to exist in, the mode itt winch they wore paolislied in tee Gazettes. It they we!e ta vourab,e; to his !Majesty's Ministers, they were acs competed by a comment (signed by the Right Ho noueible Gen Leman), setting ;forth the., gracicsis mintier in which they had been received. If, hews ever, they were adverse to Ministers, no such le- - cord was made ; and any acknowledgment of their receipt proceeded from the Right HOnourable Gen- ' ileinari in It's coldest manner - possible. Was it to 'be believed, therefore, that all these Petitions and Addresses reached his Majesty ?—WaS ti to be be. lieved hat his M ,jesty would treat in a different m eines persons quslly loyal and attached' to nits]; bectus- in the oiie case they *commended, and in the o net ey coedernued an Administratioe ? ,He bent .n its timid the copy of a letter from the Right Hull. Gentleman to a very. respedable who having been anxious CO present.a Petition to his Majesty, was desired to send it to the Office of. the Secretary of Suits. On replying that he presumed the Seieetary of State would read his letter to. his Atlejesty, the Right Honourable Gentleman r ex s pressea 'nsei! at a loss to understand. how the victual to whom fie alluded e could suppose it possible that he should hiinseil read his Petition to th&King; and declared thatehe should not himself au thorised to de so, unless lie were to receive his Ma . jes'y'i comma . ,ds to inat effed. The • Right Hon. Gentlemati bad Compared chose whom,he termed . the detuagoguss of the present time, with those ~.whom be termed the boutefeur of 30 or 40 years ago. He had no doubt that posterity wouLd set the same seal on them bo;h. He had no doubt that posterity would sanetion with equal applause the eflOrts of individuals of-the present day to resist the unjust claims of that _House, and the. efforts of Wilkes and Oliver to, resist - the unjust power over which they ultimately triumphed. Mr. R. S. DUNDAs. replied to the Noble Lord who bad taken so different a groutid from that of ,the worthy Alderman, and who had , supported the. motion not on the merits of that individual case, but on the general question- of the obstruction of the sebjeCt in his right to petition. The Noble Lord thought that Vere was such a difference between presenting a Petition at the Levee to the Kings by whom it was handed to the Lord in Waiting, and transmitting it to the Secretary of State, as to create an obstrudtion to the right of petitioning in the latter CJS , ', which did not exist in the fOrmer.' Sep posing -it possible that his Majesty would slight the Petitions of any of his subjects, what greater, assur ance wassthere that they would be submitted - to his Majesty's peru•al by the Lord in Waiting, ,than by the Secretary. of State.; with respect to the Yeti." don teem an individual, to which the - Noble Lord had alluded, he would supply a deficiency in the , Noble Lord's statement. The Petitioner Was Major Cart wrignt, who Wished to present to the King's own hand a Petition, comprising- his opinion on the sate of public afiaits. His Majesty's Ministers,- how ever did not think thst Major Cartwright was in titled io a greater privilege than the Livery of Lou. den, and the rest of hits Majesty's subjects. No • ttii ng could be more absurd than to suppose it pos. Bible the S.eretary of - State could read to his Ma jesty all the Petitions and Addresses which were , transmitted to him: He did his duty if he for warded throe to his Mejesiy with, the lest of the public documents, for his Majesty. 10 pertl,tt at leisure.' Noble Lard thouceot proper n that the cessation of the usage of presenting Peet- c